As a nation we still continue to enjoy a literally unprecedented prosperity;
and it is probable that only reckless speculation and disregard of legitimate
business methods on the part of the business world can materially mar this
prosperity.

No Congress in our time has done more good work of importance than the
present Congress. There were several matters left unfinished at your last
session, however, which I most earnestly hope you will complete before
your adjournment.

I again recommend a law prohibiting all corporations from contributing
to the campaign expenses of any party. Such a bill has already past one
House of Congress. Let individuals contribute as they desire; but let us
prohibit in effective fashion all corporations from making contributions
for any political purpose, directly or indirectly.

Another bill which has just past one House of the Congress and which
it is urgently necessary should be enacted into law is that conferring
upon the Government the right of appeal in criminal cases on questions
of law. This right exists in many of the States; it exists in the District
of Columbia by act of the Congress. It is of course not proposed that in
any case a verdict for the defendant on the merits should be set aside.
Recently in one district where the Government had indicted certain persons
for conspiracy in connection with rebates, the court sustained the defendant's
demurrer; while in another jurisdiction an indictment for conspiracy to
obtain rebates has been sustained by the court, convictions obtained under
it, and two defendants sentenced to imprisonment. The two cases referred
to may not be in real conflict with each other, but it is unfortunate that
there should even be an apparent conflict. At present there is no way by
which the Government can cause such a conflict, when it occurs, to be solved
by an appeal to a higher court; and the wheels of justice are blocked without
any real decision of the question. I can not too strongly urge the passage
of the bill in question. A failure to pass it will result in seriously
hampering the Government in its effort to obtain justice, especially against
wealthy individuals or corporations who do wrong; and may also prevent
the Government from obtaining justice for wage-workers who are not themselves
able effectively to contest a case where the judgment of an inferior court
has been against them. I have specifically in view a recent decision by
a district judge leaving railway employees without remedy for violation
of a certain so-called labor statute. It seems an absurdity to permit a
single district judge, against what may be the judgment of the immense
majority of his colleagues on the bench, to declare a law solemnly enacted
by the Congress to be "unconstitutional," and then to deny to the Government
the right to have the Supreme Court definitely decide the question.

It is well to recollect that the real efficiency of the law often depends
not upon the passage of acts as to which there is great public excitement,
but upon the passage of acts of this nature as to which there is not much
public excitement, because there is little public understanding of their
importance, while the interested parties are keenly alive to the desirability
of defeating them. The importance of enacting into law the particular bill
in question is further increased by the fact that the Government has now
definitely begun a policy of resorting to the criminal law in those trust
and interstate commerce cases where such a course offers a reasonable chance
of success. At first, as was proper, every effort was made to enforce these
laws by civil proceedings; but it has become increasingly evident that
the action of the Government in finally deciding, in certain cases, to
undertake criminal proceedings was justifiable; and tho there have been
some conspicuous failures in these cases, we have had many successes, which
have undoubtedly had a deterrent effect upon evil-doers, whether the penalty
inflicted was in the shape of fine or imprisonment--and penalties of both
kinds have already been inflicted by the courts. Of course, where the judge
can see his way to inflict the penalty of imprisonment the deterrent effect
of the punishment on other offenders is increased; but sufficiently heavy
fines accomplish much. Judge Holt, of the New York district court, in a
recent decision admirably stated the need for treating with just severity
offenders of this kind. His opinion runs in part as follows:

'The Government's evidence to establish the defendant's guilt was clear,
conclusive, and undisputed. The case was a flagrant one. The transactions
which took place under this illegal contract were very large; the amounts
of rebates returned were considerable; and the amount of the rebate itself
was large, amounting to more than one-fifth of the entire tariff charge
for the transportation of merchandise from this city to Detroit. It is
not too much to say, in my opinion, that if this business was carried on
for a considerable time on that basis--that is, if this discrimination
in favor of this particular shipper was made with an 18 instead of a 23
cent rate and the tariff rate was maintained as against their competitors--the
result might be and not improbably would be that their competitors would
be driven out of business. This crime is one which in its nature is deliberate
and premeditated. I think over a fortnight elapsed between the date of
Palmer's letter requesting the reduced rate and the answer of the railroad
company deciding to grant it, and then for months afterwards this business
was carried on and these claims for rebates submitted month after month
and checks in payment of them drawn month after month. Such a violation
of the law, in my opinion, in its essential nature, is a very much more
heinous act than the ordinary common, vulgar crimes which come before criminal
courts constantly for punishment and which arise from sudden passion or
temptation. This crime in this case was committed by men of education and
of large business experience, whose standing in the community was such
that they might have been expected to set an example of obedience to law
upon the maintenance of which alone in this country the security of their
property depends. It was committed on behalf of a great railroad corporation,
which, like other railroad corporations, has received gratuitously from
the State large and valuable privileges for the public's convenience and
its own, which performs quasi public functions and which is charged with
the highest obligation in the transaction of its business to treat the
citizens of this country alike, and not to carry on its business with unjust
discriminations between different citizens or different classes of citizens.
This crime in its nature is one usually done with secrecy, and proof of
which it is very difficult to obtain. The interstate commerce act was past
in 1887, nearly twenty years ago. Ever since that time complaints of the
granting of rebates by railroads have been common, urgent, and insistent,
and altho the Congress has repeatedly past legislation endeavoring to put
a stop to this evil, the difficulty of obtaining proof upon which to bring
prosecution in these cases is so great that this is the first case that
has ever been brought in this court, and, as I am formed, this case and
one recently brought in Philadelphia are the only cases that have ever
been brought in the eastern part of this country. In fact, but few cases
of this kind have ever been brought in this country, East or West. Now,
under these circumstances, I am forced to the conclusion, in a case in
which the proof is so clear and the facts are so flagrant, it is the duty
of the court to fix a penalty which shall in some degree be commensurate
with the gravity of the offense. As between the two defendants, in my opinion,
the principal penalty should be imposed on the corporation. The traffic
manager in this case, presumably, acted without any advantage to himself
and without any interest in the transaction, either by the direct authority
or in accordance with what he understood to be the policy or the wishes
of his employer.

"The sentence of this court in this case is, that the defendant Pomeroy,
for each of the six offenses upon which he has been convicted, be fined
the sum of $1,000, making six fines, amounting in all to the sum of $6,000;
and the defendant, The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company,
for each of the six crimes of which it has been convicted, be fined the
sum of $18,000, making six fines amounting in the aggregate to the sum
of $108,000, and judgment to that effect will be entered in this case."

In connection with this matter, I would like to call attention to the
very unsatisfactory state of our criminal law, resulting in large part
from the habit of setting aside the judgments of inferior courts on technicalities
absolutely unconnected with the merits of the case, and where there is
no attempt to show that there has been any failure of substantial justice.
It would be well to enact a law providing something to the effect that:

No judgment shall be set aside or new trial granted in any cause, civil
or criminal, on the ground of misdirection of the jury or the improper
admission or rejection of evidence, or for error as to any matter of pleading
or procedure unless, in the opinion of the court to which the application
is made, after an examination of the entire cause, it shall affirmatively
appear that the error complained of has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

In my last message I suggested the enactment of a law in connection
with the issuance of injunctions, attention having been sharply drawn to
the matter by the demand that the right of applying injunctions in labor
cases should be wholly abolished. It is at least doubtful whether a law
abolishing altogether the use of injunctions in such cases would stand
the test of the courts; in which case of course the legislation would be
ineffective. Moreover, I believe it would be wrong altogether to prohibit
the use of injunctions. It is criminal to permit sympathy for criminals
to weaken our hands in upholding the law; and if men seek to destroy life
or property by mob violence there should be no impairment of the power
of the courts to deal with them in the most summary and effective way possible.
But so far as possible the abuse of the power should be provided against
by some such law as I advocated last year.

In this matter of injunctions there is lodged in the hands of the judiciary
a necessary power which is nevertheless subject to the possibility of grave
abuse. It is a power that should be exercised with extreme care and should
be subject to the jealous scrutiny of all men, and condemnation should
be meted out as much to the judge who fails to use it boldly when necessary
as to the judge who uses it wantonly or oppressively. Of course a judge
strong enough to be fit for his office will enjoin any resort to violence
or intimidation, especially by conspiracy, no matter what his opinion may
be of the rights of the original quarrel. There must be no hesitation in
dealing with disorder. But there must likewise be no such abuse of the
injunctive power as is implied in forbidding laboring men to strive for
their own betterment in peaceful and lawful ways; nor must the injunction
be used merely to aid some big corporation in carrying out schemes for
its own aggrandizement. It must be remembered that a preliminary injunction
in a labor case, if granted without adequate proof (even when authority
can be found to support the conclusions of law on which it is founded),
may often settle the dispute between the parties; and therefore if improperly
granted may do irreparable wrong. Yet there are many judges who assume
a matter-of-course granting of a preliminary injunction to be the ordinary
and proper judicial disposition of such cases; and there have undoubtedly
been flagrant wrongs committed by judges in connection with labor disputes
even within the last few years, altho I think much less often than in former
years. Such judges by their unwise action immensely strengthen the hands
of those who are striving entirely to do away with the power of injunction;
and therefore such careless use of the injunctive process tends to threaten
its very existence, for if the American people ever become convinced that
this process is habitually abused, whether in matters affecting labor or
in matters affecting corporations, it will be well-nigh impossible to prevent
its abolition.

It may be the highest duty of a judge at any given moment to disregard,
not merely the wishes of individuals of great political or financial power,
but the overwhelming tide of public sentiment; and the judge who does thus
disregard public sentiment when it is wrong, who brushes aside the plea
of any special interest when the pleading is not rounded on righteousness,
performs the highest service to the country. Such a judge is deserving
of all honor; and all honor can not be paid to this wise and fearless judge
if we permit the growth of an absurd convention which would forbid any
criticism of the judge of another type, who shows himself timid in the
presence of arrogant disorder, or who on insufficient grounds grants an
injunction that does grave injustice, or who in his capacity as a construer,
and therefore in part a maker, of the law, in flagrant fashion thwarts
the cause of decent government. The judge has a power over which no review
can be exercised; he himself sits in review upon the acts of both the executive
and legislative branches of the Government; save in the most extraordinary
cases he is amenable only at the bar of public opinion; and it is unwise
to maintain that public opinion in reference to a man with such power shall
neither be exprest nor led.

The best judges have ever been foremost to disclaim any immunity from
criticism. This has been true since the days of the great English Lord
Chancellor Parker, who said: "Let all people be at liberty to know what
I found my judgment upon; that, so when I have given it in any cause, others
may be at liberty to judge of me." The proprieties of the case were set
forth with singular clearness and good temper by Judge W. H. Taft, when
a United States circuit judge, eleven years ago, in 1895:

"The opportunity freely and publicly to criticize judicial action is
of vastly more importance to the body politic than the immunity of courts
and judges from unjust aspersions and attack. Nothing tends more to render
judges careful in their decisions and anxiously solicitous to do exact
justice than the consciousness that every act of theirs is to be subjected
to the intelligent scrutiny and candid criticism of their fellow-men. Such
criticism is beneficial in proportion as it is fair, dispassionate, discriminating,
and based on a knowledge of sound legal principles. The comments made by
learned text writers and by the acute editors of the various law reviews
upon judicial decisions are therefore highly useful. Such critics constitute
more or less impartial tribunals of professional opinion before which each
judgment is made to stand or fall on its merits, and thus exert a strong
influence to secure uniformity of decision. But non-professional criticism
also is by no means without its uses, even if accompanied, as it often
is, by a direct attack upon the judicial fairness and motives of the occupants
of the bench; for if the law is but the essence of common sense, the protest
of many average men may evidence a defect in a judicial conclusion, tho
based on the nicest legal reasoning and profoundest learning. The two important
elements of moral character in a judge are an earnest desire to reach a
just conclusion and courage to enforce it. In so far as fear of public
comment does not affect the courage of a judge, but only spurs him on to
search his conscience and to reach the result which approves itself to
his inmost heart such comment serves a useful purpose. There are few men,
whether they are judges for life or for a shorter term, who do not prefer
to earn and hold the respect of all, and who can not be reached and made
to pause and deliberate by hostile public criticism. In the case of judges
having a life tenure, indeed their very independence makes the right freely
to comment on their decisions of greater importance, because it is the
only practical and available instrument in the hands of a free people to
keep such judges alive to the reasonable demands of those they serve.

"On the other hand, the danger of destroying the proper influence of
judicial decisions by creating unfounded prejudices against the courts
justifies and requires that unjust attacks shall be met and answered. Courts
must ultimately rest their defense upon the inherent strength of the opinions
they deliver as the ground for their conclusions and must trust to the
calm and deliberate judgment of all the people as their best vindication."

There is one consideration which should be taken into account by the
good people who carry a sound proposition to an excess in objecting to
any criticism of a judge's decision. The instinct of the American people
as a whole is sound in this matter. They will not subscribe to the doctrine
that any public servant is to be above all criticism. If the best citizens,
those most competent to express their judgment in such matters, and above
all those belonging to the great and honorable profession of the bar, so
profoundly influential in American life, take the position that there shall
be no criticism of a judge under any circumstances, their view will not
be accepted by the American people as a whole. In such event the people
will turn to, and tend to accept as justifiable, the intemperate and improper
criticism uttered by unworthy agitators. Surely it is a misfortune to leave
to such critics a function, right, in itself, which they are certain to
abuse. Just and temperate criticism, when necessary, is a safeguard against
the acceptance by the people as a whole of that intemperate antagonism
towards the judiciary which must be combated by every right-thinking man,
and which, if it became widespread among the people at large, would constitute
a dire menace to the Republic.

In connection with the delays of the law, I call your attention and
the attention of the Nation to the prevalence of crime among us, and above
all to the epidemic of lynching and mob violence that springs up, now in
one part of our country, now in another. Each section, North, South, East,
or West, has its own faults; no section can with wisdom spend its time
jeering at the faults of another section; it should be busy trying to amend
its own shortcomings. To deal with the crime of corruption It is necessary
to have an awakened public conscience, and to supplement this by whatever
legislation will add speed and certainty in the execution of the law. When
we deal with lynching even mote is necessary. A great many white men are
lynched, but the crime is peculiarly frequent in respect to black men.
The greatest existing cause of lynching is the perpetration, especially
by black men, of the hideous crime of rape--the most abominable in all
the category of crimes, even worse than murder. Mobs frequently avenge
the commission of this crime by themselves torturing to death the man committing
it; thus avenging in bestial fashion a bestial deed, and reducing themselves
to a level with the criminal.

Lawlessness grows by what it feeds upon; and when mobs begin to lynch
for rape they speedily extend the sphere of their operations and lynch
for many other kinds of crimes, so that two-thirds of the lynchings are
not for rape at all; while a considerable proportion of the individuals
lynched are innocent of all crime. Governor Candler, of Georgia, stated
on one occasion some years ago: "I can say of a verity that I have, within
the last month, saved the lives of half a dozen innocent Negroes who were
pursued by the mob, and brought them to trial in a court of law in which
they were acquitted." As Bishop Galloway, of Mississippi, has finely said:
"When the rule of a mob obtains, that which distinguishes a high civilization
is surrendered. The mob which lynches a negro charged with rape will in
a little while lynch a white man suspected of crime. Every Christian patriot
in America needs to lift up his voice in loud and eternal protest against
the mob spirit that is threatening the integrity of this Republic." Governor
Jelks, of Alabama, has recently spoken as follows: "The lynching of any
person for whatever crime is inexcusable anywhere--it is a defiance of
orderly government; but the killing of innocent people under any provocation
is infinitely more horrible; and yet innocent people are likely to die
when a mob's terrible lust is once aroused. The lesson is this: No good
citizen can afford to countenance a defiance of the statutes, no matter
what the provocation. The innocent frequently suffer, and, it is my observation,
more usually suffer than the guilty. The white people of the South indict
the whole colored race on the ground that even the better elements lend
no assistance whatever in ferreting out criminals of their own color. The
respectable colored people must learn not to harbor their criminals, but
to assist the officers in bringing them to justice. This is the larger
crime, and it provokes such atrocious offenses as the one at Atlanta. The
two races can never get on until there is an understanding on the part
of both to make common cause with the law-abiding against criminals of
any color."

Moreover, where any crime committed by a member of one race against
a member of another race is avenged in such fashion that it seems as if
not the individual criminal, but the whole race, is attacked, the result
is to exasperate to the highest degree race feeling. There is but one safe
rule in dealing with black men as with white men; it is the same rule that
must be applied in dealing with rich men and poor men; that is, to treat
each man, whatever his color, his creed, or his social position, with even-handed
justice on his real worth as a man. White people owe it quite as much to
themselves as to the colored race to treat well the colored man who shows
by his life that he deserves such treatment; for it is surely the highest
wisdom to encourage in the colored race all those individuals who are honest,
industrious, law-abiding, and who therefore make good and safe neighbors
and citizens. Reward or punish the individual on his merits as an individual.
Evil will surely come in the end to both races if we substitute for this
just rule the habit of treating all the members of the race, good and bad,
alike. There is no question of "social equality" or "negro domination"
involved; only the question of relentlessly punishing bad men, and of securing
to the good man the right to his life, his liberty, and the pursuit of
his happiness as his own qualities of heart, head, and hand enable him
to achieve it.

Every colored man should realize that the worst enemy of his race is
the negro criminal, and above all the negro criminal who commits the dreadful
crime of rape; and it should be felt as in the highest degree an offense
against the whole country, and against the colored race in particular,
for a colored man to fail to help the officers of the law in hunting down
with all possible earnestness and zeal every such infamous offender. Moreover,
in my judgment, the crime of rape should always be punished with death,
as is the case with murder; assault with intent to commit rape should be
made a capital crime, at least in the discretion of the court; and provision
should be made by which the punishment may follow immediately upon the
heels of the offense; while the trial should be so conducted that the victim
need not be wantonly shamed while giving testimony, and that the least
possible publicity shall be given to the details.

The members of the white race on the other hand should understand that
every lynching represents by just so much a loosening of the bands of civilization;
that the spirit of lynching inevitably throws into prominence in the community
all the foul and evil creatures who dwell therein. No man can take part
in the torture of a human being without having his own moral nature permanently
lowered. Every lynching means just so much moral deterioration in all the
children who have any knowledge of it, and therefore just so much additional
trouble for the next generation of Americans.

Let justice be both sure and swift; but let it be justice under the
law, and not the wild and crooked savagery of a mob.

There is another matter which has a direct bearing upon this matter
of lynching and of the brutal crime which sometimes calls it forth and
at other times merely furnishes the excuse for its existence. It is out
of the question for our people as a whole permanently to rise by treading
down any of their own number. Even those who themselves for the moment
profit by such maltreatment of their fellows will in the long run also
suffer. No more shortsighted policy can be imagined than, in the fancied
interest of one class, to prevent the education of another class. The free
public school, the chance for each boy or girl to get a good elementary
education, lies at the foundation of our whole political situation. In
every community the poorest citizens, those who need the schools most,
would be deprived of them if they only received school facilities proportioned
to the taxes they paid. This is as true of one portion of our country as
of another. It is as true for the negro as for the white man. The white
man, if he is wise, will decline to allow the Negroes in a mass to grow
to manhood and womanhood without education. Unquestionably education such
as is obtained in our public schools does not do everything towards making
a man a good citizen; but it does much. The lowest and most brutal criminals,
those for instance who commit the crime of rape, are in the great majority
men who have had either no education or very little; just as they are almost
invariably men who own no property; for the man who puts money by out of
his earnings, like the man who acquires education, is usually lifted above
mere brutal criminality. Of course the best type of education for the colored
man, taken as a whole, is such education as is conferred in schools like
Hampton and Tuskegee; where the boys and girls, the young men and young
women, are trained industrially as well as in the ordinary public school
branches. The graduates of these schools turn out well in the great majority
of cases, and hardly any of them become criminals, while what little criminality
there is never takes the form of that brutal violence which invites lynch
law. Every graduate of these schools--and for the matter of that every
other colored man or woman--who leads a life so useful and honorable as
to win the good will and respect of those whites whose neighbor he or she
is, thereby helps the whole colored race as it can be helped in no other
way; for next to the negro himself, the man who can do most to help the
negro is his white neighbor who lives near him; and our steady effort should
be to better the relations between the two. Great tho the benefit of these
schools has been to their colored pupils and to the colored people, it
may well be questioned whether the benefit, has not been at least as great
to the white people among whom these colored pupils live after they graduate.

Be it remembered, furthermore, that the individuals who, whether from
folly, from evil temper, from greed for office, or in a spirit of mere
base demagogy, indulge in the inflammatory and incendiary speeches and
writings which tend to arouse mobs and to bring about lynching, not only
thus excite the mob, but also tend by what criminologists call "suggestion,"
greatly to increase the likelihood of a repetition of the very crime against
which they are inveighing. When the mob is composed of the people of one
race and the man lynched is of another race, the men who in their speeches
and writings either excite or justify the action tend, of course, to excite
a bitter race feeling and to cause the people of the opposite race to lose
sight of the abominable act of the criminal himself; and in addition, by
the prominence they give to the hideous deed they undoubtedly tend to excite
in other brutal and depraved natures thoughts of committing it. Swift,
relentless, and orderly punishment under the law is the only way by which
criminality of this type can permanently be supprest.

In dealing with both labor and capital, with the questions affecting
both corporations and trades unions, there is one matter more important
to remember than aught else, and that is the infinite harm done by preachers
of mere discontent. These are the men who seek to excite a violent class
hatred against all men of wealth. They seek to turn wise and proper movements
for the better control of corporations and for doing away with the abuses
connected with wealth, into a campaign of hysterical excitement and falsehood
in which the aim is to inflame to madness the brutal passions of mankind.
The sinister demagogs and foolish visionaries who are always eager to undertake
such a campaign of destruction sometimes seek to associate themselves with
those working for a genuine reform in governmental and social methods,
and sometimes masquerade as such reformers. In reality they are the worst
enemies of the cause they profess to advocate, just as the purveyors of
sensational slander in newspaper or magazine are the worst enemies of all
men who are engaged in an honest effort to better what is bad in our social
and governmental conditions. To preach hatred of the rich man as such,
to carry on a campaign of slander and invective against him, to seek to
mislead and inflame to madness honest men whose lives are hard and who
have not the kind of mental training which will permit them to appreciate
the danger in the doctrines preached--all this is to commit a crime against
the body politic and to be false to every worthy principle and tradition
of American national life. Moreover, while such preaching and such agitation
may give a livelihood and a certain notoriety to some of those who take
part in it, and may result in the temporary political success of others,
in the long run every such movement will either fail or else will provoke
a violent reaction, which will itself result not merely in undoing the
mischief wrought by the demagog and the agitator, but also in undoing the
good that the honest reformer, the true upholder of popular rights, has
painfully and laboriously achieved. Corruption is never so rife as in communities
where the demagog and the agitator bear full sway, because in such communities
all moral bands become loosened, and hysteria and sensationalism replace
the spirit of sound judgment and fair dealing as between man and man. In
sheer revolt against the squalid anarchy thus produced men are sure in
the end to turn toward any leader who can restore order, and then their
relief at being free from the intolerable burdens of class hatred, violence,
and demagogy is such that they can not for some time be aroused to indignation
against misdeeds by men of wealth; so that they permit a new growth of
the very abuses which were in part responsible for the original outbreak.
The one hope for success for our people lies in a resolute and fearless,
but sane and cool-headed, advance along the path marked out last year by
this very Congress. There must be a stern refusal to be misled into following
either that base creature who appeals and panders to the lowest instincts
and passions in order to arouse one set of Americans against their fellows,
or that other creature, equally base but no baser, who in a spirit of greed,
or to accumulate or add to an already huge fortune, seeks to exploit his
fellow Americans with callous disregard to their welfare of soul and body.
The man who debauches others in order to obtain a high office stands on
an evil equality of corruption with the man who debauches others for financial
profit; and when hatred is sown the crop which springs up can only be evil.

The plain people who think--the mechanics, farmers, merchants, workers
with head or hand, the men to whom American traditions are dear, who love
their country and try to act decently by their neighbors, owe it to themselves
to remember that the most damaging blow that can be given popular government
is to elect an unworthy and sinister agitator on a platform of violence
and hypocrisy. Whenever such an issue is raised in this country nothing
can be gained by flinching from it, for in such case democracy is itself
on trial, popular self-government under republican forms is itself on trial.
The triumph of the mob is just as evil a thing as the triumph of the plutocracy,
and to have escaped one danger avails nothing whatever if we succumb to
the other. In the end the honest man, whether rich or poor, who earns his
own living and tries to deal justly by his fellows, has as much to fear
from the insincere and unworthy demagog, promising much and performing
nothing, or else performing nothing but evil, who would set on the mob
to plunder the rich, as from the crafty corruptionist, who, for his own
ends, would permit the common people to be exploited by the very wealthy.
If we ever let this Government fall into the hands of men of either of
these two classes, we shall show ourselves false to America's past. Moreover,
the demagog and the corruptionist often work hand in hand. There are at
this moment wealthy reactionaries of such obtuse morality that they regard
the public servant who prosecutes them when they violate the law, or who
seeks to make them bear their proper share of the public burdens, as being
even more objectionable than the violent agitator who hounds on the mob
to plunder the rich. There is nothing to choose between such a reactionary
and such an agitator; fundamentally they are alike in their selfish disregard
of the rights of others; and it is natural that they should join in opposition
to any movement of which the aim is fearlessly to do exact and even justice
to all.

I call your attention to the need of passing the bill limiting the number
of hours of employment of railroad employees. The measure is a very moderate
one and I can conceive of no serious objection to it. Indeed, so far as
it is in our power, it should be our aim steadily to reduce the number
of hours of labor, with as a goal the general introduction of an eight-hour
day. There are industries in which it is not possible that the hours of
labor should be reduced; just as there are communities not far enough advanced
for such a movement to be for their good, or, if in the Tropics, so situated
that there is no analogy between their needs and ours in this matter. On
the Isthmus of Panama, for instance, the conditions are in every way so
different from what they are here that an eight-hour day would be absurd;
just as it is absurd, so far as the Isthmus is concerned, where white labor
can not be employed, to bother as to whether the necessary work is done
by alien black men or by alien yellow men. But the wageworkers of the United
States are of so high a grade that alike from the merely industrial standpoint
and from the civic standpoint it should be our object to do what we can
in the direction of securing the general observance of an eight-hour day.
Until recently the eight-hour law on our Federal statute books has been
very scantily observed. Now, however, largely thru the instrumentality
of the Bureau of Labor, it is being rigidly enforced, and I shall speedily
be able to say whether or not there is need of further legislation in reference
thereto; .for our purpose is to see it obeyed in spirit no less than in
letter. Half holidays during summer should be established for Government
employees; it is as desirable for wageworkers who toil with their hands
as for salaried officials whose labor is mental that there should be a
reasonable amount of holiday.

The Congress at its last session wisely provided for a truant court
for the District of Columbia; a marked step in advance on the path of properly
caring for the children. Let me again urge that the Congress provide for
a thoro investigation of the conditions of child labor and of the labor
of women in the United States. More and more our people are growing to
recognize the fact that the questions which are not merely of industrial
but of social importance outweigh all others; and these two questions most
emphatically come in the category of those which affect in the most far-reaching
way the home life of the Nation. The horrors incident to the employment
of young children in factories or at work anywhere are a blot on our civilization.
It is true that each. State must ultimately settle the question in its
own way; but a thoro official investigation of the matter, with the results
published broadcast, would greatly help toward arousing the public conscience
and securing unity of State action in the matter. There is, however, one
law on the subject which should be enacted immediately, because there is
no need for an investigation in reference thereto, and the failure to enact
it is discreditable to the National Government. A drastic and thorogoing
child-labor law should be enacted for the District of Columbia and the
Territories.

Among the excellent laws which the Congress past at the last session
was an employers' liability law. It was a marked step in advance to get
the recognition of employers' liability on the statute books; but the law
did not go far enough. In spite of all precautions exercised by employers
there are unavoidable accidents and even deaths involved in nearly every
line of business connected with the mechanic arts. This inevitable sacrifice
of life may be reduced to a minimum, but it can not be completely eliminated.
It is a great social injustice to compel the employee, or rather the family
of the killed or disabled victim, to bear the entire burden of such an
inevitable sacrifice. In other words, society shirks its duty by laying
the whole cost on the victim, whereas the injury comes from what may be
called the legitimate risks of the trade. Compensation for accidents or
deaths due in any line of industry to the actual conditions under which
that industry is carried on, should be paid by that portion of the community
for the benefit of which the industry is carried on--that is, by those
who profit by the industry. If the entire trade risk is placed upon the
employer he will promptly and properly add it to the legitimate cost of
production and assess it proportionately upon the consumers of his commodity.
It is therefore clear to my mind that the law should place this entire
"risk of a trade" upon the employer. Neither the Federal law, nor, as far
as I am informed, the State laws dealing with the question of employers'
liability are sufficiently thorogoing. The Federal law should of course
include employees in navy-yards, arsenals, and the like.

The commission appointed by the President October 16, 1902, at the request
of both the anthracite coal operators and miners, to inquire into, consider,
and pass upon the questions in controversy in connection with the strike
in the anthracite regions of Pennsylvania and the causes out of which the
controversy arose, in their report, findings, and award exprest the belief
"that the State and Federal governments should provide the machinery for
what may be called the compulsory investigation of controversies between
employers and employees when they arise." This expression of belief is
deserving of the favorable consideration of the Congress and the enactment
of its provisions into law. A bill has already been introduced to this
end.

Records show that during the twenty years from January 1, 1881, to,
December 31, 1900, there were strikes affecting 117,509 establishments,
and 6,105,694 employees were thrown out of employment. During the same
period there were 1,005 lockouts, involving nearly 10,000 establishments,
throwing over one million people out of employment. These strikes and lockouts
involved an estimated loss to employees of $307,000,000 and to employers
of $143,000,000, a total of $450,000,000. The public suffered directly
and indirectly probably as great additional loss. But the money loss, great
as it was, did not measure the anguish and suffering endured by the wives
and children of employees whose pay stopt when their work stopt, or the
disastrous effect of the strike or lockout upon the business of employers,
or the increase in the cost of products and the inconvenience and loss
to the public.

Many of these strikes and lockouts would not have occurred had the parties
to the dispute been required to appear before an unprejudiced body representing
the nation and, face to face, state the reasons for their contention. In
most instances the dispute would doubtless be found to be due to a misunderstanding
by each of the other's rights, aggravated by an unwillingness of either
party to accept as true the statements of the other as to the justice or
injustice of the matters in dispute. The exercise of a judicial spirit
by a disinterested body representing the Federal Government, such as would
be provided by a commission on conciliation and arbitration, would tend
to create an atmosphere of friendliness and conciliation between contending
parties; and the giving each side an equal opportunity to present fully
its case in the presence of the other would prevent many disputes from
developing into serious strikes or lockouts, and, in other cases, would
enable the commission to persuade the opposing parties to come to terms.

In this age of great corporate and labor combinations, neither employers
nor employees should be left completely at the mercy of the stronger party
to a dispute, regardless of the righteousness of their respective claims.
The proposed measure would be in the line of securing recognition of the
fact that in many strikes the public has itself an interest which can not
wisely be disregarded; an interest not merely of general convenience, for
the question of a just and proper public policy must also be considered.
In all legislation of this kind it is well to advance cautiously, testing
each step by the actual results; the step proposed can surely be safely
taken, for the decisions of the commission would not bind the parties in
legal fashion, and yet would give a chance for public opinion to crystallize
and thus to exert its full force for the right.

It is not wise that the Nation should alienate its remaining coal lands.
I have temporarily withdrawn from settlement all the lands which the Geological
Survey has indicated as containing, or in all probability containing, coal.
The question, however, can be properly settled only by legislation, which
in my judgment should provide for the withdrawal of these lands from sale
or from entry, save in certain especial circumstances. The ownership would
then remain in the United States, which should not, however, attempt to
work them, but permit them to be worked by private individuals under a
royalty system, the Government keeping such control as to permit it to
see that no excessive price was charged consumers. It would, of course,
be as necessary to supervise the rates charged by the common carriers to
transport the product as the rates charged by those who mine it; and the
supervision must extend to the conduct of the common carriers, so that
they shall in no way favor one competitor at the expense of another. The
withdrawal of these coal lands would constitute a policy analogous to that
which has been followed in withdrawing the forest lands from ordinary settlement.
The coal, like the forests, should be treated as the property of the public
and its disposal should be under conditions which would inure to the benefit
of the public as a whole.

The present Congress has taken long strides in the direction of securing
proper supervision and control by the National Government over corporations
engaged in interstate business and the enormous majority of corporations
of any size are engaged in interstate business. The passage of the railway
rate bill, and only to a less degree the passage of the pure food bill,
and the provision for increasing and rendering more effective national
control over the beef-packing industry, mark an important advance in the
proper direction. In the short session it will perhaps be difficult to
do much further along this line; and it may be best to wait until the laws
have been in operation for a number of months before endeavoring to increase
their scope, because only operation will show with exactness their merits
and their shortcomings and thus give opportunity to define what further
remedial legislation is needed. Yet in my judgment it will in the end be
advisable in connection with the packing house inspection law to provide
for putting a date on the label and for charging the cost of inspection
to the packers. All these laws have already justified their enactment.
The interstate commerce law, for instance, has rather amusingly falsified
the predictions, both of those who asserted that it would ruin the railroads
and of those who asserted that it did not go far enough and would accomplish
nothing. During the last five months the railroads have shown increased
earnings and some of them unusual dividends; while during the same period
the mere taking effect of the law has produced an unprecedented, a hitherto
unheard of, number of voluntary reductions in freights and fares by the
railroads. Since the founding of the Commission there has never been a
time of equal length in which anything like so many reduced tariffs have
been put into effect. On August 27, for instance, two days before the new
law went into effect, the Commission received notices of over five thousand
separate tariffs which represented reductions from previous rates.

It must not be supposed, however, that with the passage of these laws
it will be possible to stop progress along the line of increasing the power
of the National Government over the use of capital interstate commerce.
For example, there will ultimately be need of enlarging the powers of the
Interstate Commerce Commission along several different lines, so as to
give it a larger and more efficient control over the railroads.

It can not too often be repeated that experience has conclusively shown
the impossibility of securing by the actions of nearly half a hundred different
State legislatures anything but ineffective chaos in the way of dealing
with the great corporations which do not operate exclusively within the
limits of any one State. In some method, whether by a national license
law or in other fashion, we must exercise, and that at an early date, a
far more complete control than at present over these great corporations--a
control that will among other things prevent the evils of excessive overcapitalization,
and that will compel the disclosure by each big corporation of its stockholders
and of its properties and business, whether owned directly or thru subsidiary
or affiliated corporations. This will tend to put a stop to the securing
of inordinate profits by favored individuals at the expense whether of
the general public, the stockholders, or the wageworkers. Our effort should
be not so much to prevent consolidation as such, but so to supervise and
control it as to see that it results in no harm to the people. The reactionary
or ultraconservative apologists for the misuse of wealth assail the effort
to secure such control as a step toward socialism. As a matter of fact
it is these reactionaries and ultraconservatives who are themselves most
potent in increasing socialistic feeling. One of the most efficient methods
of averting the consequences of a dangerous agitation, which is 80 per
cent wrong, is to remedy the 20 per cent of evil as to which the agitation
is well rounded. The best way to avert the very undesirable move for the
government ownership of railways is to secure by the Government on behalf
of the people as a whole such adequate control and regulation of the great
interstate common carriers as will do away with the evils which give rise
to the agitation against them. So the proper antidote to the dangerous
and wicked agitation against the men of wealth as such is to secure by
proper legislation and executive action the abolition of the grave abuses
which actually do obtain in connection with the business use of wealth
under our present system--or rather no system--of failure to exercise any
adequate control at all. Some persons speak as if the exercise of such
governmental control would do away with the freedom of individual initiative
and dwarf individual effort. This is not a fact. It would be a veritable
calamity to fail to put a premium upon individual initiative, individual
capacity and effort; upon the energy, character, and foresight which it
is so important to encourage in the individual. But as a matter of fact
the deadening and degrading effect of pure socialism, and especially of
its extreme form communism, and the destruction of individual character
which they would bring about, are in part achieved by the wholly unregulated
competition which results in a single individual or corporation rising
at the expense of all others until his or its rise effectually checks all
competition and reduces former competitors to a position of utter inferiority
and subordination.

In enacting and enforcing such legislation as this Congress already
has to its credit, we are working on a coherent plan, with the steady endeavor
to secure the needed reform by the joint action of the moderate men, the
plain men who do not wish anything hysterical or dangerous, but who do
intend to deal in resolute common-sense fashion with the real and great
evils of the present system. The reactionaries and the violent extremists
show symptoms of joining hands against us. Both assert, for instance, that,
if logical, we should go to government ownership of railroads and the like;
the reactionaries, because on such an issue they think the people would
stand with them, while the extremists care rather to preach discontent
and agitation than to achieve solid results. As a matter of fact, our position
is as remote from that of the Bourbon reactionary as from that of the impracticable
or sinister visionary. We hold that the Government should not conduct the
business of the nation, but that it should exercise such supervision as
will insure its being conducted in the interest of the nation. Our aim
is, so far as may be, to secure, for all decent, hard working men, equality
of opportunity and equality of burden.

The actual working of our laws has shown that the effort to prohibit
all combination, good or bad, is noxious where it is not ineffective. Combination
of capital like combination of labor is a necessary element of our present
industrial system. It is not possible completely to prevent it; and if
it were possible, such complete prevention would do damage to the body
politic. What we need is not vainly to try to prevent all combination,
but to secure such rigorous and adequate control and supervision of the
combinations as to prevent their injuring the public, or existing in such
form as inevitably to threaten injury--for the mere fact that a combination
has secured practically complete control of a necessary of life would under
any circumstances show that such combination was to be presumed to be adverse
to the public interest. It is unfortunate that our present laws should
forbid all combinations, instead of sharply discriminating between those
combinations which do good and those combinations which do evil. Rebates,
for instance, are as often due to the pressure of big shippers (as was
shown in the investigation of the Standard Oil Company and as has been
shown since by the investigation of the tobacco and sugar trusts) as to
the initiative of big railroads. Often railroads would like to combine
for the purpose of preventing a big shipper from maintaining improper advantages
at the expense of small shippers and of the general public. Such a combination,
instead of being forbidden by law, should be favored. In other words, it
should be permitted to railroads to make agreements, provided these agreements
were sanctioned by the Interstate Commerce Commission and were published.
With these two conditions complied with it is impossible to see what harm
such a combination could do to the public at large. It is a public evil
to have on the statute books a law incapable of full enforcement because
both judges and juries realize that its full enforcement would destroy
the business of the country; for the result is to make decent railroad
men violators of the law against their will, and to put a premium on the
behavior of the wilful wrongdoers. Such a result in turn tends to throw
the decent man and the wilful wrongdoer into close association, and in
the end to drag down the former to the latter's level; for the man who
becomes a lawbreaker in one way unhappily tends to lose all respect for
law and to be willing to break it in many ways. No more scathing condemnation
could be visited upon a law than is contained in the words of the Interstate
Commerce Commission when, in commenting upon the fact that the numerous
joint traffic associations do technically violate the law, they say: "The
decision of the United States Supreme Court in the Trans-Missouri case
and the Joint Traffic Association case has produced no practical effect
upon the railway operations of the country. Such associations, in fact,
exist now as they did before these decisions, and with the same general
effect. In justice to all parties, we ought probably to add that it is
difficult to see how our interstate railways could be operated with due
regard to the interest of the shipper and the railway without concerted
action of the kind afforded thru these associations."

This means that the law as construed by the Supreme Court is such that
the business of the country can not be conducted without breaking it. I
recommend that you give careful and early consideration to this subject,
and if you find the opinion of the Interstate Commerce Commission justified,
that you amend the law so as to obviate the evil disclosed.

The question of taxation is difficult in any country, but it is especially
difficult in ours with its Federal system of government. Some taxes should
on every ground be levied in a small district for use in that district.
Thus the taxation of real estate is peculiarly one for the immediate locality
in which the real estate is found. Again, there is no more legitimate tax
for any State than a tax on the franchises conferred by that State upon
street railroads and similar corporations which operate wholly within the
State boundaries, sometimes in one and sometimes in several municipalities
or other minor divisions of the State. But there are many kinds of taxes
which can only be levied by the General Government so as to produce the
best results, because, among other reasons, the attempt to impose them
in one particular State too often results merely in driving the corporation
or individual affected to some other locality or other State. The National
Government has long derived its chief revenue from a tariff on imports
and from an internal or excise tax. In addition to these there is every
reason why, when next our system of taxation is revised, the National Government
should impose a graduated inheritance tax, and, if possible, a graduated
income tax. The man of great wealth owes a peculiar obligation to the State,
because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of government.
Not only should he recognize this obligation in the way he leads his daily
life and in the way he earns and spends his money, but it should also be
recognized by the way in which he pays for the protection the State gives
him. On the one hand, it is desirable that he should assume his full and
proper share of the burden of taxation; on the other hand, it is quite
as necessary that in this kind of taxation, where the men who vote the
tax pay but little of it, there should be clear recognition of the danger
of inaugurating any such system save in a spirit of entire justice and
moderation. Whenever we, as a people, undertake to remodel our taxation
system along the lines suggested, we must make it clear beyond peradventure
that our aim is to distribute the burden of supporting the Government more
equitably than at present; that we intend to treat rich man and poor man
on a basis of absolute equality, and that we regard it as equally fatal
to true democracy to do or permit injustice to the one as to do or permit
injustice to the other.

I am well aware that such a subject as this needs long and careful study
in order that the people may become familiar with what is proposed to be
done, may clearly see the necessity of proceeding with wisdom and self-restraint,
and may make up their minds just how far they are willing to go in the
matter; while only trained legislators can work out the project in necessary
detail. But I feel that in the near future our national legislators should
enact a law providing for a graduated inheritance tax by which a steadily
increasing rate of duty should be put upon all moneys or other valuables
coming by gift, bequest, or devise to any individual or corporation. It
may be well to make the tax heavy in proportion as the individual benefited
is remote of kin. In any event, in my judgment the pro rata of the tax
should increase very heavily with the increase of the amount left to any
one individual after a certain point has been reached. It is most desirable
to encourage thrift and ambition, and a potent source of thrift and ambition
is the desire on the part of the breadwinner to leave his children well
off. This object can be attained by making the tax very small on moderate
amounts of property left; because the prime object should be to put a constantly
increasing burden on the inheritance of those swollen fortunes which it
is certainly of no benefit to this country to perpetuate.

There can be no question of the ethical propriety of the Government
thus determining the conditions upon which any gift or inheritance should
be received. Exactly how far the inheritance tax would, as an incident,
have the effect of limiting the transmission by devise or gift of the enormous
fortunes in question it is not necessary at present to discuss. It is wise
that progress in this direction should be gradual. At first a permanent
national inheritance tax, while it might be more substantial than any such
tax has hitherto been, need not approximate, either in amount or in the
extent of the increase by graduation, to what such a tax should ultimately
be.

This species of tax has again and again been imposed, altho only temporarily,
by the National Government. It was first imposed by the act of July 6,
1797, when the makers of the Constitution were alive and at the head of
affairs. It was a graduated tax; tho small in amount, the rate was increased
with the amount left to any individual, exceptions being made in the case
of certain close kin. A similar tax was again imposed by the act of July
1, 1862; a minimum sum of one thousand dollars in personal property being
excepted from taxation, the tax then becoming progressive according to
the remoteness of kin. The war-revenue act of June 13, 1898, provided for
an inheritance tax on any sum exceeding the value of ten thousand dollars,
the rate of the tax increasing both in accordance with the amounts left
and in accordance with the legatee's remoteness of kin. The Supreme Court
has held that the succession tax imposed at the time of the Civil War was
not a direct tax but an impost or excise which was both constitutional
and valid. More recently the Court, in an opinion delivered by Mr. Justice
White, which contained an exceedingly able and elaborate discussion of
the powers of the Congress to impose death duties, sustained the constitutionality
of the inheritance-tax feature of the war-revenue act of 1898.

In its incidents, and apart from the main purpose of raising revenue,
an income tax stands on an entirely different footing from an inheritance
tax; because it involves no question of the perpetuation of fortunes swollen
to an unhealthy size. The question is in its essence a question of the
proper adjustment of burdens to benefits. As the law now stands it is undoubtedly
difficult to devise a national income tax which shall be constitutional.
But whether it is absolutely impossible is another question; and if possible
it is most certainly desirable. The first purely income-tax law was past
by the Congress in 1861, but the most important law dealing with the subject
was that of 1894. This the court held to be unconstitutional.

The question is undoubtedly very intricate, delicate, and troublesome.
The decision of the court was only reached by one majority. It is the law
of the land, and of course is accepted as such and loyally obeyed by all
good citizens. Nevertheless, the hesitation evidently felt by the court
as a whole in coming to a conclusion, when considered together with the
previous decisions on the subject, may perhaps indicate the possibility
of devising a constitutional income-tax law which shall substantially accomplish
the results aimed at. The difficulty of amending the Constitution is so
great that only real necessity can justify a resort thereto. Every effort
should be made in dealing with this subject, as with the subject of the
proper control by the National Government over the use of corporate wealth
in interstate business, to devise legislation which without such action
shall attain the desired end; but if this fails, there will ultimately
be no alternative to a constitutional amendment.

It would be impossible to overstate (tho it is of course difficult quantitatively
to measure) the effect upon a nation's growth to greatness of what may
be called organized patriotism, which necessarily includes the substitution
of a national feeling for mere local pride; with as a resultant a high
ambition for the whole country. No country can develop its full strength
so long as the parts which make up the whole each put a feeling of loyalty
to the part above the feeling of loyalty to the whole. This is true of
sections and it is just as true of classes. The industrial and agricultural
classes must work together, capitalists and wageworkers must work together,
if the best work of which the country is capable is to be done. It is probable
that a thoroly efficient system of education comes next to the influence
of patriotism in bringing about national success of this kind. Our federal
form of government, so fruitful of advantage to our people in certain ways,
in other ways undoubtedly limits our national effectiveness. It is not
possible, for instance, for the National Government to take the lead in
technical industrial education, to see that the public school system of
this country develops on all its technical, industrial, scientific, and
commercial sides. This must be left primarily to the several States. Nevertheless,
the National Government has control of the schools of the District of Columbia,
and it should see that these schools promote and encourage the fullest
development of the scholars in both commercial and industrial training.
The commercial training should in one of its branches deal with foreign
trade. The industrial training is even more important. It should be one
of our prime objects as a Nation, so far as feasible, constantly to work
toward putting the mechanic, the wageworker who works with his hands, on
a higher plane of efficiency and reward, so as to increase his effectiveness
in the economic world, and the dignity, the remuneration, and the power
of his position in the social world. Unfortunately, at present the effect
of some of the work in the public schools is in the exactly opposite direction.
If boys and girls are trained merely in literary accomplishments, to the
total exclusion of industrial, manual, and technical training, the tendency
is to unfit them for industrial work and to make them reluctant to go into
it, or unfitted to do well if they do go into it. This is a tendency which
should be strenuously combated. Our industrial development depends largely
upon technical education, including in this term all industrial education,
from that which fits a man to be a good mechanic, a good carpenter, or
blacksmith, to that which fits a man to do the greatest engineering feat.
The skilled mechanic, the skilled workman, can best become such by technical
industrial education. The far-reaching usefulness of institutes of technology
and schools of mines or of engineering is now universally acknowledged,
and no less far--reaching is the effect of a good building or mechanical
trades school, a textile, or watch-making, or engraving school. All such
training must develop not only manual dexterity but industrial intelligence.
In international rivalry this country does not have to fear the competition
of pauper labor as much as it has to fear the educated labor of specially
trained competitors; and we should have the education of the hand, eye,
and brain which will fit us to meet such competition.

In every possible way we should help the wageworker who toils with his
hands and who must (we hope in a constantly increasing measure) also toil
with his brain. Under the Constitution the National Legislature can do
but little of direct importance for his welfare save where he is engaged
in work which permits it to act under the interstate commerce clause of
the Constitution; and this is one reason why I so earnestly hope that both
the legislative and judicial branches of the Government will construe this
clause of the Constitution in the broadest possible manner. We can, however,
in such a matter as industrial training, in such a matter as child labor
and factory laws, set an example to the States by enacting the most advanced
legislation that can wisely be enacted for the District of Columbia.

The only other persons whose welfare is as vital to the welfare of the
whole country as is the welfare of the wageworkers are the tillers of the
soil, the farmers. It is a mere truism to say that no growth of cities,
no growth of wealth, no industrial development can atone for any falling
off in the character and standing of the farming population. During the
last few decades this fact has been recognized with ever-increasing clearness.
There is no longer any failure to realize that farming, at least in certain
branches, must become a technical and scientific profession. This means
that there must be open to farmers the chance for technical and scientific
training, not theoretical merely but of the most severely practical type.
The farmer represents a peculiarly high type of American citizenship, and
he must have the same chance to rise and develop as other American citizens
have. Moreover, it is exactly as true of the farmer, as it is of the business
man and the wageworker, that the ultimate success of the Nation of which
he forms a part must be founded not alone on material prosperity but upon
high moral, mental, and physical development. This education of the farmer--self-education
by preference but also education from the outside, as with all other men--is
peculiarly necessary here in the United States, where the frontier conditions
even in the newest States have now nearly vanished, where there must be
a substitution of a more intensive system of cultivation for the old wasteful
farm management, and where there must be a better business organization
among the farmers themselves.

Several factors must cooperate in the improvement of the farmer's condition.
He must have the chance to be educated in the widest possible sense--in
the sense which keeps ever in view the intimate relationship between the
theory of education and the facts of life. In all education we should widen
our aims. It is a good thing to produce a certain number of trained scholars
and students; but the education superintended by the State must seek rather
to produce a hundred good citizens than merely one scholar, and it must
be turned now and then from the class book to the study of the great book
of nature itself. This is especially true of the farmer, as has been pointed
out again and again by all observers most competent to pass practical judgment
on the problems of our country life. All students now realize that education
must seek to train the executive powers of young people and to confer more
real significance upon the phrase "dignity of labor," and to prepare the
pupils so that, in addition to each developing in the highest degree his
individual capacity for work, they may together help create a right public
opinion, and show in many ways social and cooperative spirit. Organization
has become necessary in the business world; and it has accomplished much
for good in the world of labor. It is no less necessary for farmers. Such
a movement as the grange movement is good in itself and is capable of a
well-nigh infinite further extension for good so long as it is kept to
its own legitimate business. The benefits to be derived by the association
of farmers for mutual advantage are partly economic and partly sociological.

Moreover, while in the long run voluntary efforts will prove more efficacious
than government assistance, while the farmers must primarily do most for
themselves, yet the Government can also do much. The Department of Agriculture
has broken new ground in many directions, and year by year it finds how
it can improve its methods and develop fresh usefulness. Its constant effort
is to give the governmental assistance in the most effective way; that
is, thru associations of farmers rather than to or thru individual farmers.
It is also striving to coordinate its work with the agricultural departments
of the several States, and so far as its own work is educational to coordinate
it with the work of other educational authorities. Agricultural education
is necessarily based upon general education, but our agricultural educational
institutions are wisely specializing themselves, making their courses relate
to the actual teaching of the agricultural and kindred sciences to young
country people or young city people who wish to live in the country.

Great progress has already been made among farmers by the creation of
farmers' institutes, of dairy associations, of breeders' associations,
horticultural associations, and the like. A striking example of how the
Government and the farmers can cooperate is shown in connection with the
menace offered to the cotton growers of the Southern States by the advance
of the boll weevil. The Department is doing all it can to organize the
farmers in the threatened districts, just as it has been doing all it can
to organize them in aid of its work to eradicate the cattle fever tick
in the South. The Department can and will cooperate with all such associations,
and it must have their help if its own work is to be done in the most efficient
style.

Much is now being done for the States of the Rocky Mountains and Great
Plains thru the development of the national policy of irrigation and forest
preservation; no Government policy for the betterment of our internal conditions
has been more fruitful of good than this. The forests of the White Mountains
and Southern Appalachian regions should also be preserved; and they can
not be unless the people of the States in which they lie, thru their representatives
in the Congress, secure vigorous action by the National Government.

I invite the attention of the Congress to the estimate of the Secretary
of War for an appropriation to enable him to begin the preliminary work
for the construction of a memorial amphitheater at Arlington. The Grand
Army of the Republic in its national encampment has urged the erection
of such an amphitheater as necessary for the proper observance Of Memorial
Day and as a fitting monument to the soldier and sailor dead buried there.
In this I heartily concur and commend the matter to the favorable consideration
of the Congress.

I am well aware of how difficult it is to pass a constitutional amendment.
Nevertheless in my judgment the whole question of marriage and divorce
should be relegated to the authority of the National Congress. At present
the wide differences in the laws of the different States on this subject
result in scandals and abuses; and surely there is nothing so vitally essential
to the welfare of the nation, nothing around which the nation should so
bend itself to throw every safeguard, as the home life of the average citizen.
The change would be good from every standpoint. In particular it would
be good because it would confer on the Congress the power at once to deal
radically and efficiently with polygamy; and this should be done whether
or not marriage and divorce are dealt with. It is neither safe nor proper
to leave the question of polygamy to be dealt with by the several States.
Power to deal with it should be conferred on the National Government.

When home ties are loosened; when men and women cease to regard a worthy
family life, with all its duties fully performed, and all its responsibilities
lived up to, as the life best worth living; then evil days for the commonwealth
are at hand. There are regions in our land, and classes of our population,
where the birth rate has sunk below the death rate. Surely it should need
no demonstration to show that wilful sterility is, from the standpoint
of the nation, from the standpoint of the human race, the one sin for which
the penalty is national death, race death; a sin for which there is no
atonement; a sin which is the more dreadful exactly in proportion as the
men and women guilty thereof are in other respects, in character, and bodily
and mental powers, those whom for the sake of the state it would be well
to see the fathers and mothers of many healthy children, well brought up
in homes made happy by their presence. No man, no woman, can shirk the
primary duties of life, whether for love of ease and pleasure, or for any
other cause, and retain his or her self-respect.

Let me once again call the attention of the Congress to two subjects
concerning which I have frequently before communicated with them. One is
the question of developing American shipping. I trust that a law embodying
in substance the views, or a major part of the views, exprest in the report
on this subject laid before the House at its last session will be past.
I am well aware that in former years objectionable measures have been proposed
in reference to the encouragement of American shipping; but it seems to
me that the proposed measure is as nearly unobjectionable as any can be.
It will of course benefit primarily our seaboard States, such as Maine,
Louisiana, and Washington; but what benefits part of our people in the
end benefits all; just as Government aid to irrigation and forestry in
the West is really of benefit, not only to the Rocky Mountain States, but
to all our country. If it prove impracticable to enact a law for the encouragement
of shipping generally, then at least provision should be made for better
communication with South America, notably for fast mail lines to the chief
South American ports. It is discreditable to us that our business people,
for lack of direct communication in the shape of lines of steamers with
South America, should in that great sister continent be at a disadvantage
compared to the business people of Europe.

I especially call your attention to the second subject, the condition
of our currency laws. The national bank act has ably served a great purpose
in aiding the enormous business development of the country; and within
ten years there has been an increase in circulation per capita from $21.41
to $33.08. For several years evidence has been accumulating that additional
legislation is needed. The recurrence of each crop season emphasizes the
defects of the present laws. There must soon be a revision of them, because
to leave them as they are means to incur liability of business disaster.
Since your body adjourned there has been a fluctuation in the interest
on call money from 2 per cent to 30 per cent; and the fluctuation was even
greater during the preceding six months. The Secretary of the Treasury
had to step in and by wise action put a stop to the most violent period
of oscillation. Even worse than such fluctuation is the advance in commercial
rates and the uncertainty felt in the sufficiency of credit even at high
rates. All commercial interests suffer during each crop period. Excessive
rates for call money in New York attract money from the interior banks
into the speculative field; this depletes the fund that would otherwise
be available for commercial uses, and commercial borrowers are forced to
pay abnormal rates; so that each fall a tax, in the shape of increased
interest charges, is placed on the whole commerce of the country.

The mere statement of these has shows that our present system is seriously
defective. There is need of a change. Unfortunately, however, many of the
proposed changes must be ruled from consideration because they are complicated,
are not easy of comprehension, and tend to, disturb existing rights and
interests. We must also rule out any plan which would materially impair
the value of the United States 2 per cent bonds now pledged to secure circulations,
the issue of which was made under conditions peculiarly creditable to the
Treasury. I do not press any especial plan. Various plans have recently
been proposed by expert committees of bankers. Among the plans which are
possibly feasible and which certainly should receive your consideration
is that repeatedly brought to your attention by the present Secretary of
the Treasury, the essential features of which have been approved by many
prominent bankers and business men. According to this plan national banks
should be permitted to issue a specified proportion of their capital in
notes of a given kind, the issue to be taxed at so high a rate as to drive
the notes back when not wanted in legitimate trade. This plan would not
permit the issue of currency to give banks additional profits, but to meet
the emergency presented by times of stringency.

I do not say that this is the right system. I only advance it to emphasize
my belief that there is need for the adoption of some system which shall
be automatic and open to all sound banks, so as to avoid all possibility
of discrimination and favoritism. Such a plan would tend to prevent the
spasms of high money and speculation which now obtain in the New York market;
for at present there is too much currency at certain seasons of the year,
and its accumulation at New York tempts bankers to lend it at low rates
for speculative purposes; whereas at other times when the crops are being
moved there is urgent need for a large but temporary increase in the currency
supply. It must never be forgotten that this question concerns business
men generally quite as much as bankers; especially is this true of stockmen,
farmers, and business men in the West; for at present at certain seasons
of the year the difference in interest rates between the East and the West
is from 6 to 10 per cent, whereas in Canada the corresponding difference
is but 2 per cent. Any plan must, of course, guard the interests of western
and southern bankers as carefully as it guards the interests of New York
or Chicago bankers; and must be drawn from the standpoints of the farmer
and the merchant no less than from the standpoints of the city banker and
the country banker.

The law should be amended so as specifically to provide that the funds
derived from customs duties may be treated by the Secretary of the Treasury
as he treats funds obtained under the internal-revenue laws. There should
be a considerable increase in bills of small denominations. Permission
should be given banks, if necessary under settled restrictions, to retire
their circulation to a larger amount than three millions a month.

I most earnestly hope that the bill to provide a lower tariff for or
else absolute free trade in Philippine products will become a law. No harm
will come to any American industry; and while there will be some small
but real material benefit to the Filipinos, the main benefit will come
by the showing made as to our purpose to do all in our power for their
welfare. So far our action in the Philippines has been abundantly justified,
not mainly and indeed not primarily because of the added dignity it has
given us as a nation by proving that we are capable honorably and efficiently
to bear the international burdens which a mighty people should bear, but
even more because of the immense benefit that has come to the people of
the Philippine Islands. In these islands we are steadily introducing both
liberty and order, to a greater degree than their people have ever before
known. We have secured justice. We have provided an efficient police force,
and have put down ladronism. Only in the islands of Leyte and Samar is
the authority of our Government resisted and this by wild mountain tribes
under the superstitious inspiration of fakirs and pseudo-religions leaders.
We are constantly increasing the measure of liberty accorded the islanders,
and next spring, if conditions warrant, we shall take a great stride forward
in testing their capacity for self-government by summoning the first Filipino
legislative assembly; and the way in which they stand this test will largely
determine whether the self-government thus granted will be increased or
decreased; for if we have erred at all in the Philippines it has been in
proceeding too rapidly in the direction of granting a large measure of
self-government. We are building roads. We have, for the immeasurable good
of the people, arranged for the building of railroads. Let us also see
to it that they are given free access to our markets. This nation owes
no more imperative duty to itself and mankind than the duty of managing
the affairs of all the islands under the American flag--the Philippines,
Porto Rico, and Hawaii--so as to make it evident that it is in every way
to their advantage that the flag should fly over them.

American citizenship should be conferred on the citizens of Porto Rico.
The harbor of San Juan in Porto Rico should be dredged and improved. The
expenses of the federal court of Porto Rico should be met from the Federal
Treasury. The administration of the affairs of Porto Rico, together with
those of the Philippines, Hawaii, and our other insular possessions, should
all be directed under one executive department; by preference the Department
of State or the Department of War.

The needs of Hawaii are peculiar; every aid should be given the islands;
and our efforts should be unceasing to develop them along the lines of
a community of small freeholders, not of great planters with coolie-tilled
estates. Situated as this Territory is, in the middle of the Pacific, there
are duties imposed upon this small community which do not fall in like
degree or manner upon any other American community. This warrants our treating
it differently from the way in which we treat Territories contiguous to
or surrounded by sister Territories or other States, and justifies the
setting aside of a portion of our revenues to be expended for educational
and internal improvements therein. Hawaii is now making an effort to secure
immigration fit in the end to assume the duties and burdens of full American
citizenship, and whenever the leaders in the various industries of those
islands finally adopt our ideals and heartily join our administration in
endeavoring to develop a middle class of substantial citizens, a way will
then be found to deal with the commercial and industrial problems which
now appear to them so serious. The best Americanism is that which aims
for stability and permanency of prosperous citizenship, rather than immediate
returns on large masses of capital.

Alaska's needs have been partially met, but there must be a complete
reorganization of the governmental system, as I have before indicated to
you. I ask your especial attention to this. Our fellow-citizens who dwell
on the shores of Puget Sound with characteristic energy are arranging to
hold in Seattle the Alaska Yukon Pacific Exposition. Its special aims include
the upbuilding of Alaska and the development of American commerce on the
Pacific Ocean. This exposition, in its purposes and scope, should appeal
not only to the people of the Pacific slope, but to the people of the United
States at large. Alaska since it was bought has yielded to the Government
eleven millions of dollars of revenue, and has produced nearly three hundred
millions of dollars in gold, furs, and fish. When properly developed it
will become in large degree a land of homes. The countries bordering the
Pacific Ocean have a population more numerous than that of all the countries
of Europe; their annual foreign commerce amounts to over three billions
of dollars, of which the share of the United States is some seven hundred
millions of dollars. If this trade were thoroly understood and pushed by
our manufacturers and producers, the industries not only of the Pacific
slope, but of all our country, and particularly of our cotton-growing States,
would be greatly benefited. Of course, in order to get these benefits,
we must treat fairly the countries with which we trade.

It is a mistake, and it betrays a spirit of foolish cynicism, to maintain
that all international governmental action is, and must ever be, based
upon mere selfishness, and that to advance ethical reasons for such action
is always a sign of hypocrisy. This is no more necessarily true of the
action of governments than of the action of individuals. It is a sure sign
of a base nature always to ascribe base motives for the actions of others.
Unquestionably no nation can afford to disregard proper considerations
of self-interest, any more than a private individual can so do. But it
is equally true that the average private individual in any really decent
community does many actions with reference to other men in which he is
guided, not by self-interest, but by public spirit, by regard for the rights
of others, by a disinterested purpose to do good to others, and to raise
the tone of the community as a whole. Similarly, a really great nation
must often act, and as a matter of fact often does act, toward other nations
in a spirit not in the least of mere self-interest, but paying heed chiefly
to ethical reasons; and as the centuries go by this disinterestedness in
international action, this tendency of the individuals comprising a nation
to require that nation to act with justice toward its neighbors, steadily
grows and strengthens. It is neither wise nor right for a nation to disregard
its own needs, and it is foolish--and may be wicked--to think that other
nations will disregard theirs. But it is wicked for a nation only to regard
its own interest, and foolish to believe that such is the sole motive that
actuates any other nation. It should be our steady aim to raise the ethical
standard of national action just as we strive to raise the ethical standard
of individual action.

Not only must we treat all nations fairly, but we must treat with justice
and good will all immigrants who come here under the law. Whether they
are Catholic or Protestant, Jew or Gentile; whether they come from England
or Germany, Russia, Japan, or Italy, matters nothing. All we have a right
to question is the man's conduct. If he is honest and upright in his dealings
with his neighbor and with the State, then he is entitled to respect and
good treatment. Especially do we need to remember our duty to the stranger
within our gates. It is the sure mark of a low civilization, a low morality,
to abuse or discriminate against or in any way humiliate such stranger
who has come here lawfully and who is conducting himself properly. To remember
this is incumbent on every American citizen, and it is of course peculiarly
incumbent on every Government official, whether of the nation or of the
several States.

I am prompted to say this by the attitude of hostility here and there
assumed toward the Japanese in this country. This hostility is sporadic
and is limited to a very few places. Nevertheless, it is most discreditable
to us as a people, and it may be fraught with the gravest consequences
to the nation. The friendship between the United States and Japan has been
continuous since the time, over half a century ago, when Commodore Perry,
by his expedition to Japan, first opened the islands to western civilization.
Since then the growth of Japan has been literally astounding. There is
not only nothing to parallel it, but nothing to approach it in the history
of civilized mankind. Japan has a glorious and ancient past. Her civilization
is older than that of the nations of northern Europe--the nations from
whom the people of the United States have chiefly sprung. But fifty years
ago Japan's development was still that of the Middle Ages. During that
fifty years the progress of the country in every walk in life has been
a marvel to mankind, and she now stands as one of the greatest of civilized
nations; great in the arts of war and in the arts of peace; great in military,
in industrial, in artistic development and achievement. Japanese soldiers
and sailors have shown themselves equal in combat to any of whom history
makes note. She has produced great generals and mighty admirals; her fighting
men, afloat and ashore, show all the heroic courage, the unquestioning,
unfaltering loyalty, the splendid indifference to hardship and death, which
marked the Loyal Ronins; and they show also that they possess the highest
ideal of patriotism. Japanese artists of every kind see their products
eagerly sought for in all lands. The industrial and commercial development
of Japan has been phenomenal; greater than that of any other country during
the same period. At the same time the advance in science and philosophy
is no less marked. The admirable management of the Japanese Red Cross during
the late war, the efficiency and humanity of the Japanese officials, nurses,
and doctors, won the respectful admiration of all acquainted with the facts.
Thru the Red Cross the Japanese people sent over $100,000 to the sufferers
of San Francisco, and the gift was accepted with gratitude by our people.
The courtesy of the Japanese, nationally and individually, has become proverbial.
To no other country has there been such an increasing number of visitors
from this land as to Japan. In return, Japanese have come here in great
numbers. They are welcome, socially and intellectually, in all our colleges
and institutions of higher learning, in all our professional and social
bodies. The Japanese have won in a single generation the right to stand
abreast of the foremost and most enlightened peoples of Europe and America;
they have won on their own merits and by their own exertions the right
to treatment on a basis of full and frank equality. The overwhelming mass
of our people cherish a lively regard and respect for the people of Japan,
and in almost every quarter of the Union the stranger from Japan is treated
as he deserves; that is, he is treated as the stranger from any part of
civilized Europe is and deserves to be treated. But here and there a most
unworthy feeling has manifested itself toward the Japanese--the feeling
that has been shown in shutting them out from the common schools in San
Francisco, and in mutterings against them in one or two other places, because
of their efficiency as workers. To shut them out from the public schools
is a wicked absurdity, when there are no first-class colleges in the land,
including the universities and colleges of California, which do not gladly
welcome Japanese students and on which Japanese students do not reflect
credit. We have as much to learn from Japan as Japan has to learn from
us; and no nation is fit to teach unless it is also willing to learn. Thruout
Japan Americans are well treated, and any failure on the part of Americans
at home to treat the Japanese with a like courtesy and consideration is
by just so much a confession of inferiority in our civilization.

Our nation fronts on the Pacific, just as it fronts on the Atlantic.
We hope to play a constantly growing part in the great ocean of the Orient.
We wish, as we ought to wish, for a great commercial development in our
dealings with Asia; and it is out of the question that we should permanently
have such development unless we freely and gladly extend to other nations
the same measure of justice and good treatment which we expect to receive
in return. It is only a very small body of our citizens that act badly.
Where the Federal Government has power it will deal summarily with any
such. Where the several States have power I earnestly ask that they also
deal wisely and promptly with such conduct, or else this small body of
wrongdoers may bring shame upon the great mass of their innocent and right-thinking
fellows--that is, upon our nation as a whole. Good manners should be an
international no less than an individual attribute. I ask fair treatment
for the Japanese as I would ask fair treatment for Germans or Englishmen,
Frenchmen, Russians, or Italians. I ask it as due to humanity and civilization.
I ask it as due to ourselves because we must act uprightly toward all men.

I recommend to the Congress that an act be past specifically providing
for the naturalization of Japanese who come here intending to become American
citizens. One of the great embarrassments attending the performance of
our international obligations is the fact that the Statutes of the United
States are entirely inadequate. They fail to give to the National Government
sufficiently ample power, thru United States courts and by the use of the
Army and Navy, to protect aliens in the rights secured to them under solemn
treaties which are the law of the land. I therefore earnestly recommend
that the criminal and civil statutes of the United States be so amended
and added to as to enable the President, acting for the United States Government,
which is responsible in our international relations, to enforce the rights
of aliens under treaties. Even as the law now is something can be done
by the Federal Government toward this end, and in the matter now before
me affecting the Japanese everything that it is in my power to do will
be done, and all of the forces, military and civil, of the United States
which I may lawfully employ will be so employed. There should, however,
be no particle of doubt as to the power of the National Government completely
to perform and enforce its own obligations to other nations. The mob of
a single city may at any time perform acts of lawless violence against
some class of foreigners which would plunge us into war. That city by itself
would be powerless to make defense against the foreign power thus assaulted,
and if independent of this (Government it would never venture to perform
or permit the performance of the acts complained of. The entire power and
the whole duty to protect the offending city or the offending community
lies in the hands of the United States Government. It is unthinkable that
we should continue a policy under which a given locality may be allowed
to commit a crime against a friendly nation, and the United States Government
limited, not to preventing the commission of the crime, but, in the last
resort, to defending the people who have committed it against the consequences
of their own wrongdoing.

Last August an insurrection broke out in Cuba which it speedily grew
evident that the existing Cuban Government was powerless to quell. This
Government was repeatedly asked by the then Cuban Government to intervene,
and finally was notified by the President of Cuba that he intended to resign;
that his decision was irrevocable; that none of the other constitutional
officers would consent to carry on the Government, and that he was powerless
to maintain order. It was evident that chaos was impending, and there was
every probability that if steps were not immediately taken by this Government
to try to restore order the representatives of various European nations
in the island would apply to their respective governments for armed intervention
in order to protect the lives and property of their citizens. Thanks to
the preparedness of our Navy, I was able immediately to send enough ships
to Cuba to prevent the situation from becoming hopeless; and I furthermore
dispatched to Cuba the Secretary of War and the Assistant Secretary of
State, in order that they might grapple with the situation on the ground.
All efforts to secure an agreement between the contending factions, by
which they should themselves come to an amicable understanding and settle
upon some modus vivendi--some provisional government of their own--failed.
Finally the President of the Republic resigned. The quorum of Congress
assembled failed by deliberate purpose of its members, so that there was
no power to act on his resignation, and the Government came to a halt.
In accordance with the so-called Platt amendment, which was embodied in
the constitution of Cuba, I thereupon proclaimed a provisional government
for the island, the Secretary of War acting as provisional governor until
he could be replaced by Mr. Magoon, the late minister to Panama and governor
of the Canal Zone on the Isthmus; troops were sent to support them and
to relieve the Navy, the expedition being handled with most satisfactory
speed and efficiency. The insurgent chiefs immediately agreed that their
troops should lay down their arms and disband; and the agreement was carried
out. The provisional government has left the personnel of the old government
and the old laws, so far as might be, unchanged, and will thus administer
the island for a few months until tranquillity. can be restored, a new
election properly held, and a new government inaugurated. Peace has come
in the island; and the harvesting of the sugar-cane crop, the great crop
of the island, is about to proceed.

When the election has been held and the new government inaugurated in
peaceful and orderly fashion the provisional government will come to an
end. I take this opportunity of expressing upon behalf of the American
people, with all possible solemnity, our most earnest hope that the people
of Cuba will realize the imperative need of preserving justice and keeping
order in the Island. The United States wishes nothing of Cuba except that
it shall prosper morally and materially, and wishes nothing of the Cubans
save that they shall be able to preserve order among themselves and therefore
to preserve their independence. If the elections become a farce, and if
the insurrectionary habit becomes confirmed in the Island, it is absolutely
out of the question that the Island should continue independent; and the
United States, which has assumed the sponsorship before the civilized world
for Cuba's career as a nation, would again have to intervene and to see
that the government was managed in such orderly fashion as to secure the
safety cf life and property. The path to be trodden by those who exercise
self-government is always hard, and we should have every charity and patience
with the Cubans as they tread this difficult path. I have the utmost sympathy
with, and regard for, them; but I most earnestly adjure them solemnly to
weigh their responsibilities and to see that when their new government
is started it shall run smoothly, and with freedom from flagrant denial
of right on the one hand, and from insurrectionary disturbances on the
other.

The Second International Conference of American Republics, held in Mexico
in the years 1901-2, provided for the holding of the third conference within
five years, and committed the fixing of the time and place and the arrangements
for the conference to the governing board of the Bureau of American Republics,
composed of the representatives of all the American nations in Washington.
That board discharged the duty imposed upon it with marked fidelity and
painstaking care, and upon the courteous invitation of the United States
of Brazil the conference was held at Rio de Janeiro, continuing from the
23d of July to the 29th of August last. Many subjects of common interest
to all the American nations were discust by the conference, and the conclusions
reached, embodied in a series of resolutions and proposed conventions,
will be laid before you upon the coming in of the final report of the American
delegates. They contain many matters of importance relating to the extension
of trade, the increase of communication, the smoothing away of barriers
to free intercourse, and the promotion of a better knowledge and good understanding
between the different countries represented. The meetings of the conference
were harmonious and the conclusions were reached with substantial unanimity.
It is interesting to observe that in the successive conferences which have
been held the representatives of the different American nations have been
learning' to work together effectively, for, while the First Conference
in Washington in 1889, and the Second Conference in Mexico in 1901-2, occupied
many months, with much time wasted in an unregulated and fruitless discussion,
the Third Conference at Rio exhibited much of the facility in the practical
dispatch of business which characterizes permanent deliberative bodies,
and completed its labors within the period of six weeks originally allotted
for its sessions.

Quite apart from the specific value of the conclusions reached by the
conference, the example of the representatives of all the American nations
engaging in harmonious and kindly consideration and discussion of subjects
of common interest is itself of great and substantial value for the promotion
of reasonable and considerate treatment of all international questions.
The thanks of this country are due to the Government of Brazil and to the
people of Rio de Janeiro for the generous hospitality with which our delegates,
in common with the others, were received, entertained, and facilitated
in their work.

Incidentally to the meeting of the conference, the Secretary of State
visited the city of Rio de Janeiro and was cordially received by the conference,
of which he was made an honorary president. The announcement of his intention
to make this visit was followed by most courteous and urgent invitations
from nearly all the countries of South America to visit them as the guest
of their Governments. It was deemed that by the acceptance of these invitations
we might appropriately express the real respect and friendship in which
we hold our sister Republics of the southern continent, and the Secretary,
accordingly, visited Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Panama, and
Colombia. He refrained from visiting Paraguay, Bolivia, and Ecuador only
because the distance of their capitals from the seaboard made it impracticable
with the time at his disposal. He carried with him a message of peace and
friendship, and of strong desire for good understanding and mutual helpfulness;
and he was everywhere received in the spirit of his message. The members
of government, the press, the learned professions, the men of business,
and the great masses of the people united everywhere in emphatic response
to his friendly expressions and in doing honor to the country and cause
which he represented.

In many parts of South America there has been much misunderstanding
of the attitude and purposes of the United States towards the other American
Republics. An idea had become prevalent that our assertion of the Monroe
Doctrine implied, or carried with it, an assumption of superiority, and
of a right to exercise some kind of protectorate over the countries to
whose territory that doctrine applies. Nothing could be farther from the
truth. Yet that impression continued to be a serious barrier to good understanding,
to friendly intercourse, to the introduction of American capital and the
extension of American trade. The impression was so widespread that apparently
it could not be reached by any ordinary means.

It was part of Secretary Root's mission to dispel this unfounded impression,
and there is just cause to believe that he has succeeded. In an address
to the Third Conference at Rio on the 31st of July--an address of such
note that I send it in, together with this message--he said:

"We wish for no victories but those of peace; for no territory except
our own; for no sovereignty except the sovereignty over ourselves. We deem
the independence and equal rights of the smallest and weakest member of
the family of nations entitled to as much respect as those of the greatest
empire, and we deem the observance of that respect the chief guaranty of
the weak against the oppression of the strong. We neither claim nor desire
any rights or privileges or powers that we do not freely concede to every
American Republic. We wish to increase our prosperity, to extend our trade,
to grow in wealth, in wisdom, and in spirit, but our conception of the
true way to accomplish this is not to pull down others and profit by their
ruin, but to help all friends to a common prosperity and a common growth,
that we may all become greater and stronger together. Within a few months
for the first time the recognized possessors of every foot of soil upon
the American continents can be and I hope will be represented with the
acknowledged rights of equal sovereign states in the great World Congress
at The Hague. This will be the world's formal and final acceptance of the
declaration that no part of the American continents is to be deemed subject
to colonization. Let us pledge ourselves to aid each other in the full
performance of the duty to humanity which that accepted declaration implies,
so that in time the weakest and most unfortunate of our Republics may come
to march with equal step by the side of the stronger and more fortunate.
Let us help each other to show that for all the races of men the liberty
for which we have fought and labored is the twin sister of justice and
peace. Let us unite in creating and maintaining and making effective an
all-American public opinion, whose power shall influence international
conduct and prevent international wrong, and narrow the causes of war,
and forever preserve our free lands from the burden of such armaments as
are massed behind the frontiers of Europe, and bring us ever nearer to
the perfection of ordered liberty. So shall come security and prosperity,
production and trade, wealth, learning, the arts, and happiness for us
all."

These words appear to have been received with acclaim in every part
of South America. They have my hearty approval, as I am sure they will
have yours, and I can not be wrong in the conviction that they correctly
represent the sentiments of the whole American people. I can not better
characterize the true attitude of the United States in its assertion of
the Monroe Doctrine than in the words of the distinguished former minister
of foreign affairs of Argentina, Doctor Drago, in his speech welcoming
Mr. Root at Buenos Ayres. He spoke of--

"The traditional policy of the United States (which) without accentuating
superiority or seeking preponderance, condemned the oppression of the nations
of this part of the world and the control of their destinies by the great
Powers of Europe."

It is gratifying to know that in the great city of Buenos Ayres, upon
the arches which spanned the streets, entwined with Argentine and American
flags for the reception of our representative, there were emblazoned not'
only the names of Washington and Jefferson and Marshall, but also, in appreciative
recognition of their services to the cause of South American independence,
the names of James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, and Richard Rush.
We take especial pleasure in the graceful courtesy of the Government of
Brazil, which has given to the beautiful and stately building first used
for the meeting of the conference the name of "Palacio Monroe." Our grateful
acknowledgments are due to the Governments and the people of all the countries
visited by the Secretary of State for the courtesy, the friendship, and
the honor shown to our country in their generous hospitality to him.

In my message to you on the 5th of December, 1905, I called your attention
to the embarrassment that might be caused to this Government by the assertion
by foreign nations of the right to collect by force of arms contract debts
due by American republics to citizens of the collecting nation, and to
the danger that the process of compulsory collection might result in the
occupation of territory tending to become permanent. I then said:

"Our own Government has always refused to enforce such contractual obligations
on behalf of its citizens by an appeal to arms. It is much to be wisht
that all foreign governments would take the same view."

This subject was one of the topics of consideration at the conference
at Rio and a resolution was adopted by that conference recommending to
the respective governments represented "to consider the advisability of
asking the Second Peace Conference at The Hague to examine the question
of the compulsory collection of public debts, and, in general, means tending
to diminish among nations conflicts of purely pecuniary origin."

This resolution was supported by the representatives of the United States
in accordance with the following instructions:

"It has long been the established policy of the United States not to
use its armed forces for the collection of ordinary contract debts due
to its citizens by other governments. We have not considered the use of
force for such a purpose consistent with that respect for the independent
sovereignty of other members of the family of nations which is the most
important principle of international law and the chief protection of weak
nations against the oppression of the strong. It seems to us that the practise
is injurious in its general effect upon the relations of nations and upon
the welfare of weak and disordered states, whose development ought to be
encouraged in the interests of civilization; that it offers frequent temptation
to bullying and oppression and to unnecessary and unjustifiable warfare.
We regret that other powers, whose opinions and sense of justice we esteem
highly, have at times taken a different view and have permitted themselves,
tho we believe with reluctance, to collect such debts by force. It is doubtless
true that the non-payment of public debts may be accompanied by such circumstances
of fraud and wrongdoing or violation of treaties as to justify the use
of force. This Government would be glad to see an international consideration
of the subject which shall discriminate between such cases and the simple
nonperformance of a contract with a private person, and a resolution in
favor of reliance upon peaceful means in cases of the latter class.

"It is not felt, however, that the conference at Rio should undertake
to make such a discrimination or to resolve upon such a rule. Most of the
American countries are still debtor nations, while the countries of Europe
are the creditors. If the Rio conference, therefore, were to take such
action it would have the appearance of a meeting of debtors resolving how
their creditors should act, and this would not inspire respect. The true
course is indicated by the terms of the program, which proposes to request
the Second Hague Conference, where both creditors and debtors will be assembled,
to consider the subject."

Last June trouble which had existed for some time between the Republics
of Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras culminated in war--a war which threatened
to be ruinous to the countries involved and very destructive to the commercial
interests of Americans, Mexicans, and other foreigners who are taking an
important part in the development of these countries. The thoroly good
understanding which exists between the United States and Mexico enabled
this Government and that of Mexico to unite in effective mediation between
the warring Republics; which mediation resulted, not without long-continued
and patient effort, in bringing about a meeting of the representatives
of the hostile powers on board a United States warship as neutral territory,
and peace was there concluded; a peace which resulted in the saving of
thousands of lives and in the prevention of an incalculable amount of misery
and the destruction of property and of the means of livelihood. The Rio
Conference past the following resolution in reference to this action:

"That the Third International American Conference shall address to the
Presidents of the United States of America and of the United States of
Mexico a note in which the conference which is being held at Rio expresses
its satisfaction at the happy results of their mediation for the celebration
of peace between the Republics of Guatemala, Honduras, and Salvador."

This affords an excellent example of one way in which the influence
of the United States can properly be exercised for the benefit of the peoples
of the Western Hemisphere; that is, by action taken in concert with other
American republics and therefore free from those suspicions and prejudices
which might attach if the action were taken by one alone. In this way it
is possible to exercise a powerful influence toward the substitution of
considerate action in the spirit of justice for the insurrectionary or
international violence which has hitherto been so great a hindrance to
the development of many of our neighbors. Repeated examples of united action
by several or many American republics in favor of peace, by urging cool
and reasonable, instead of excited and belligerent, treatment of international
controversies, can not fail to promote the growth of a general public opinion
among the American nations which will elevate the standards of international
action, strengthen the sense of international duty among governments, and
tell in favor of the peace of mankind.

I have just returned from a trip to Panama and shall report to you at
length later on the whole subject of the Panama Canal.

The Algeciras Convention, which was signed by the United States as well
as by most of the powers of Europe, supersedes the previous convention
of 1880, which was also signed both by the United States and a majority
of the European powers. This treaty confers upon us equal commercial rights
with all European countries and does not entail a single obligation of
any kind upon us, and I earnestly hope it may be speedily ratified. To
refuse to ratify it would merely mean that we forfeited our commercial
rights in Morocco and would not achieve another object of any kind. In
the event of such refusal we would be left for the first time in a hundred
and twenty years without any commercial treaty with Morocco; and this at
a time when we are everywhere seeking new markets and outlets for trade.

The destruction of the Pribilof Islands fur seals by pelagic sealing
still continues. The herd which, according to the surveys made in 1874
by direction of the Congress, numbered 4,700,000, and which, according
to the survey of both American and Canadian commissioners in 1891, amounted
to 1,000,000, has now been reduced to about 180,000. This result has been
brought about by Canadian and some other sealing vessels killing the female
seals while in the water during their annual pilgrimage to and from the
south, or in search of food. As a rule the female seal when killed is pregnant,
and also has an unweaned pup on land, so that, for each skin taken by pelagic
sealing, as a rule, three lives are destroyed--the mother, the unborn offspring,
and the nursing pup, which is left to starve to death. No damage whatever
is done to the herd by the carefully regulated killing on land; the custom
of pelagic sealing is solely responsible for all of the present evil, and
is alike indefensible from the economic standpoint and from the standpoint
of humanity.

In 1896 over 16,000 young seals were found dead from starvation on the
Pribilof Islands. In 1897 it was estimated that since pelagic sealing began
upward of 400,000 adult female seals had been killed at sea, and over 300,000
young seals had died of starvation as the result. The revolting barbarity
of such a practise, as well as the wasteful destruction which it involves,
needs no demonstration and is its own condemnation. The Bering Sea Tribunal,
which sat in Paris in 1893, and which decided against the claims of the
United States to exclusive jurisdiction in the waters of Bering Sea and
to a property right in the fur seals when outside of the three-mile limit,
determined also upon certain regulations which the Tribunal considered
sufficient for the proper protection and preservation of the fur seal.
in, or habitually resorting to, the Bering Sea. The Tribunal by its regulations
established a close season, from the 1st of May to the 31st of July, and
excluded all killing in the waters within 60 miles around the Pribilof
Islands. They also provided that the regulations which they had determined
upon, with a view to the protection and preservation of the seals, should
be submitted every five years to new examination, so as to enable both
interested Governments to consider whether, in the light of past experience,
there was occasion for any modification thereof.

The regulations have proved plainly inadequate to accomplish the object
of protection and preservation of the fur seals, and for a long time this
Government has been trying in vain to secure from Great Britain such revision
and modification of the regulations as were contemplated and provided for
by the award of the Tribunal of Paris.

The process of destruction has been accelerated during recent years
by the appearance of a number of Japanese vessels engaged in pelagic sealing.
As these vessels have not been bound even by the inadequate limitations
prescribed by the Tribunal of Paris, they have paid no attention either
to the close season or to the sixty-mile limit imposed upon the Canadians,
and have prosecuted their work up to the very islands themselves. On July
16 and 17 the crews from several Japanese vessels made raids upon the island
of St. Paul, and before they were beaten off by the very meager and insufficiently
armed guard, they succeeded in killing several hundred seals and carrying
off the skins of most of them. Nearly all the seals killed were females
and the work was done with frightful barbarity. Many of the seals appear
to have been skinned alive and many were found half skinned and still alive.
The raids were repelled only by the use of firearms, and five of the raiders
were killed, two were wounded, and twelve captured, including the two wounded.
Those captured have since been tried and sentenced to imprisonment. An
attack of this kind had been wholly unlookt for, but such provision of
vessels, arms, and ammunition will now be made that its repetition will
not be found profitable.

Suitable representations regarding the incident have been made to the
Government of Japan, and we are assured that all practicable measures will
be taken by that country to prevent any recurrence of the outrage. On our
part, the guard on the island will be increased and better equipped and
organized, and a better revenue-cutter patrol service about the islands
will be established; next season a United States war vessel will also be
sent there.

We have not relaxed our efforts to secure an agreement with Great Britain
for adequate protection of the seal herd, and negotiations with Japan for
the same purpose are in progress.

The laws for the protection of the seals within the jurisdiction of
the United States need revision and amendment. Only the islands of St.
Paul and St. George are now, in terms, included in the Government reservation,
and the other islands are also to be included. The landing of aliens as
well as citizens upon the islands, without a permit from the Department
of Commerce and Labor, for any purpose except in case of stress of weather
or for water, should be prohibited under adequate penalties. The approach
of vessels for the excepted purposes should be regulated. The authority
of the Government agents on the islands should be enlarged, and the chief
agent should have the powers of a committing magistrate. The entrance of
a vessel into the territorial waters surrounding the islands with intent
to take seals should be made a criminal offense and cause of forfeiture.
Authority for seizures in such cases should be given and the presence on
any such vessel of seals or sealskins, or the paraphernalia for taking
them, should be made prima facie evidence of such intent. I recommend what
legislation is needed to accomplish these ends; and I commend to your attention
the report of Mr. Sims, of the Department of Commerce and Labor, on this
subject.

In case we are compelled to abandon the hope of making arrangements
with other governments to put an end to the hideous cruelty now incident
to pelagic sealing, it will be a question for your serious consideration
how far we should continue to protect and maintain the seal herd on land
with the result of continuing such a practise, and whether it is not better
to end the practice by exterminating the herd ourselves in the most humane
way possible.

In my last message I advised you that the Emperor of Russia had taken
the initiative in bringing about a second peace conference at The Hague.
Under the guidance of Russia the arrangement of the preliminaries for such
a conference has been progressing during the past year. Progress has necessarily
been slow, owing to the great number of countries to be consulted upon
every question that has arisen. It is a matter of satisfaction that all
of the American Republics have now, for the first time, been invited to
join in the proposed conference.

The close connection between the subjects to be taken up by the Red
Cross Conference held at Geneva last summer and the subjects which naturally
would come before The Hague Conference made it apparent that it was desirable
to have the work of the Red Cross Conference completed and considered by
the different powers before the meeting at The Hague. The Red Cross Conference
ended its labors on the 6th day of July, and the revised and amended convention,
which was signed by the American delegates, will be promptly laid before
the Senate.

By the special and highly appreciated courtesy of the Governments of
Russia and the Netherlands, a proposal to call The Hague Conference together
at a time which would conflict with the Conference of the American Republics
at Rio de Janeiro in August was laid aside. No other date has yet been
suggested. A tentative program for the conference has been proposed by
the Government of Russia, and the subjects which it enumerates are undergoing
careful examination and consideration in preparation for the conference.

It must ever be kept in mind that war is not merely justifiable, but
imperative, upon honorable men, upon an honorable nation, where peace can
only be obtained by the sacrifice of conscientious conviction or of national
welfare. Peace is normally a great good, and normally it coincides with
righteousness; but it is righteousness and not peace which should bind
the conscience of a nation as it should bind the conscience of an individual;
and neither a nation nor an individual can surrender conscience to another's
keeping. Neither can a nation, which is an entity, and which does not die
as individuals die, refrain from taking thought for the interest of the
generations that are to come, no less than for the interest of the generation
of to-day; and no public men have a right, whether from shortsightedness,
from selfish indifference, or from sentimentality, to sacrifice national
interests which are vital in character. A just war is in the long run far
better for a nation's soul than the most prosperous peace obtained by acquiescence
in wrong or injustice. Moreover, tho it is criminal for a nation not to
prepare for war, so that it may escape the dreadful consequences of being
defeated in war, yet it must always be remembered that even to be defeated
in war may be far better than not to have fought at all. As has been well
and finely said, a beaten nation is not necessarily a disgraced nation;
but the nation or man is disgraced if the obligation to defend right is
shirked.

We should as a nation do everything in our power for the cause of honorable
peace. It is morally as indefensible for a nation to commit a wrong upon
another nation, strong or weak, as for an individual thus to wrong his
fellows. We should do all in our power to hasten the day when there shall
be peace among the nations--a peace based upon justice and not upon cowardly
submission to wrong. We can accomplish a good deal in this direction, but
we can not accomplish everything, and the penalty of attempting to do too
much would almost inevitably be to do worse than nothing; for it must be
remembered that fantastic extremists are not in reality leaders of the
causes which they espouse, but are ordinarily those who do most to hamper
the real leaders of the cause and to damage the cause itself. As yet there
is no likelihood of establishing any kind of international power, of whatever
sort, which can effectively check wrongdoing, and in these circumstances
it would be both a foolish and an evil thing for a great and free nation
to deprive itself of the power to protect its own rights and even in exceptional
cases to stand up for the rights of others. Nothing would more promote
iniquity, nothing would further defer the reign upon earth of peace and
righteousness, than for the free and enlightened peoples which, tho with
much stumbling and many shortcomings, nevertheless strive toward justice,
deliberately to render themselves powerless while leaving every despotism
and barbarism armed and able to work their wicked will. The chance for
the settlement of disputes peacefully, by arbitration, now depends mainly
upon the possession by the nations that mean to do right of sufficient
armed strength to make their purpose effective.

The United States Navy is the surest guarantor of peace which this country
possesses. It is earnestly to be wisht that we would profit by the teachings
of history in this matter. A strong and wise people will study its own
failures no less than its triumphs, for there is wisdom to be learned from
the study of both, of the mistake as well as of the success. For this purpose
nothing could be more instructive than a rational study of the war of 1812,
as it is told, for instance, by Captain Mahan. There was only one way in
which that war could have been avoided. If during the preceding twelve
years a navy relatively as strong as that which this country now has had
been built up, and an army provided relatively as good as that which the
country now has, there never would have been the slightest necessity of
fighting the war; and if the necessity had arisen the war would under such
circumstances have ended with our speedy and overwhelming triumph. But
our people during those twelve years refused to make any preparations whatever,
regarding either the Army or the Navy. They saved a million or two of dollars
by so doing; and in mere money paid a hundredfold for each million they
thus saved during the three years of war which followed--a war which brought
untold suffering upon our people, which at one time threatened the gravest
national disaster, and which, in spite of the necessity of waging it, resulted
merely in what was in effect a drawn battle, while the balance of defeat
and triumph was almost even.

I do not ask that we continue to increase our Navy. I ask merely that
it be maintained at its present strength; and this can be done only if
we replace the obsolete and outworn ships by new and good ones, the equals
of any afloat in any navy. To stop building ships for one year means that
for that year the Navy goes back instead of forward. The old battle ship
Texas, for instance, would now be of little service in a stand-up fight
with a powerful adversary. The old double-turret monitors have outworn
their usefulness, while it was a waste of money to build the modern single-turret
monitors. All these ships should be replaced by others; and this can be
done by a well-settled program of providing for the building each year
of at least one first-class battle ship equal in size and speed to any
that any nation is at the same time building; the armament presumably to
consist of as large a number as possible of very heavy guns of one caliber,
together with smaller guns to repel torpedo attack; while there should
be heavy armor, turbine engines, and in short, every modern device. Of
course, from time to time, cruisers, colliers, torpedo-boat destroyers
or torpedo boats, Will have to be built also. All this, be it remembered,
would not increase our Navy, but would merely keep it at its present strength.
Equally of course, the ships will be absolutely useless if the men aboard
them are not so trained that they can get the best possible service out
of the formidable but delicate and complicated mechanisms intrusted to
their care. The marksmanship of our men has so improved during the last
five years that I deem it within bounds to say that the Navy is more than
twice as efficient, ship for ship, as half a decade ago. The Navy can only
attain proper efficiency if enough officers and men are provided, and if
these officers and men are given the chance (and required to take advantage
of it) to stay continually at sea and to exercise the fleets singly and
above all in squadron, the exercise to be of every kind and to include
unceasing practise at the guns, conducted under conditions that will test
marksmanship in time of war.

In both the Army and the Navy there is urgent need that everything possible
should be done to maintain the highest standard for the personnel, alike
as regards the officers and the enlisted men. I do not believe that in
any service there is a finer body of enlisted men and of junior officer
than we have in both the Army and the Navy, including the Marine Corps.
All possible encouragement to the enlisted men should be given, in pay
and otherwise, and everything practicable done to render the service attractive
to men of the right type. They should be held to the strictest discharge
of their duty, and in them a spirit should be encouraged which demands
not the mere performance of duty, but the performance of far more than
duty, if it conduces to the honor and the interest of the American nation;
and in return the amplest consideration should be theirs.

West Point and Annapolis already turn out excellent officers. We do
not need to have these schools made more scholastic. On the contrary we
should never lose sight of the fact that the aim of each school is to turn
out a man who shall be above everything else a fighting man. In the Army
in particular it is not necessary that either the cavalry or infantry officer
should have special mathematical ability. Probably in both schools the
best part of the education is the high standard of character and of professional
morale which it confers.

But in both services there is urgent need for the establishment of a
principle of selection which will eliminate men after a certain age if
they can not be promoted from the subordinate ranks, and which will bring
into the higher ranks fewer men, and these at an earlier age. This principle
of selection will be objected to by good men of mediocre capacity, who
are fitted to do well while young in the lower positions, but who are not
fitted to do well when at an advanced age they come into positions of command
and of great responsibility. But the desire of these men to be promoted
to positions which they are not competent to fill should not weigh against
the interest of the Navy and the country. At present our men, especially
in the Navy, are kept far too long in the junior grades, and then, at much
too advanced an age, are put quickly thru the senior grades, often not
attaining to these senior grades until they are too old to be of real use
in them; and if they are of real use, being put thru them so quickly that
little benefit to the Navy comes from their having been in them at all.

The Navy has one great advantage over the Army in the fact that the
officers of high rank are actually trained in the continual performance
of their duties; that is, in the management of the battle ships and armored
cruisers gathered into fleets. This is not true of the army officers, who
rarely have corresponding chances to exercise command over troops under
service conditions. The conduct of the Spanish war showed the lamentable
loss of life, the useless extravagance, and the inefficiency certain to
result, if during peace the high officials of the War and Navy Departments
are praised and rewarded only if they save money at no matter what cost
to the efficiency of the service, and if the higher officers are given
no chance whatever to exercise and practise command. For years prior to
the Spanish war the Secretaries of War were praised chiefly if they practised
economy; which economy, especially in connection with the quartermaster,
commissary, and medical departments, was directly responsible for most
of the mismanagement that occurred in the war itself--and parenthetically
be it observed that the very people who clamored for the misdirected economy
in the first place were foremost to denounce the mismanagement, loss, and
suffering which were primarily due to this same misdirected economy and
to the lack of preparation it involved. There should soon be an increase
in the number of men for our coast defenses; these men should be of the
right type and properly trained; and there should therefore be an increase
of pay for certain skilled grades, especially in the coast artillery. Money
should be appropriated to permit troops to be massed in body and exercised
in maneuvers, particularly in marching. Such exercise during the summer
just past has been of incalculable benefit to the Army and should under
no circumstances be discontinued. If on these practise marches and in these
maneuvers elderly officers prove unable to bear the strain, they should
be retired at once, for the fact is conclusive as to their unfitness for
war; that is, for the only purpose because of which they should be allowed
to stay in the service. It is a real misfortune to have scores of small
company or regimental posts scattered thruout the country; the Army should
be gathered in a few brigade or division posts; and the generals should
be practised in handling the men in masses. Neglect to provide for all
of this means to incur the risk of future disaster and disgrace.

The readiness and efficiency of both the Army and Navy in dealing with
the recent sudden crisis in Cuba illustrate afresh their value to the Nation.
This readiness and efficiency would have been very much less had it not
been for the existence of the General Staff in the Army and the General
Board in the Navy; both are essential to the proper development and use
of our military forces afloat and ashore. The troops that were sent to
Cuba were handled flawlessly. It was the swiftest mobilization and dispatch
of troops over sea ever accomplished by our Government. The expedition
landed completely equipped and ready for immediate service, several of
its organizations hardly remaining in Havana over night before splitting
up into detachments and going to their several posts, It was a fine demonstration
of the value and efficiency of the General Staff. Similarly, it was owing
in large part to the General Board that the Navy was able at the outset
to meet the Cuban crisis with such instant efficiency; ship after ship
appearing on the shortest notice at any threatened point, while the Marine
Corps in particular performed indispensable service. The Army and Navy
War Colleges are of incalculable value to the two services, and they cooperate
with constantly increasing efficiency and importance.

The Congress has most wisely provided for a National Board for the promotion
of rifle practise. Excellent results have already come from this law, but
it does not go far enough. Our Regular Army is so small that in any great
war we should have to trust mainly to volunteers; and in such event these
volunteers should already know how to shoot; for if a soldier has the fighting
edge, and ability to take care of himself in the open, his efficiency on
the line of battle is almost directly Proportionate to excellence in marksmanship.
We should establish shooting galleries in all the large public and military
schools, should maintain national target ranges in different parts of the
country, and should in every way encourage the formation of rifle clubs
thruout all parts of the land. The little Republic of Switzerland offers
us an excellent example in all matters connected with building up an efficient
citizen soldiery.